i was one of the founders of clan destino. some of you may remember that in 2004 we allowed ourselves to be somewhat sponsored by monster energy drink. monster provided us with a big rig sound stage and tons of drinks to giveaway. at the end of the week, that truck rolled up the esplanade with its logo blazing on the way to the gate - and in 2005, bmorg kicked our asses off the esplanade for good. and rightly so. lesson learned; we were fucking stupid to allow that to happen.

so now i'm wondering about the scheduled big name DJs lined up for 2011 (Shpongle, Infected Mushroom, EOTO, Mimosa, and Adam Ohana, etc) many arranged to play BM by coast 2 coast entertainment. granted, they'll be playing for free - but aren't these performers, like monster, gaining commercially from being on the playa? these performers are essentially brands, like monster. they get benefit by saying they were at burning man. effectively, it's corporate branding. each one of these groups and performers are doing it for the exposure - why else would coast 2 coast line them up?

so why did cland destino get kicked off the esplanade in 2005 for branding, and now camps like opulent temple and bass camp get the bmorg nod and approval for effectively doing the same thing? if it's different, i don't understand the difference. monster is a business and so is infected mushroom, et al.

has something changed?

Last edited by starlightbright on Mon Aug 08, 2011 4:13 pm, edited 2 times in total.

By that logic even a theme camp with a recognizable name should not be able to fly their camp's name on a banner at their camp. Nobody knew who or what Opulent Temple was till they came to BM. Now look at 'em, they are a regular household name within the community and beyond.

Crazy - I'd known there was drama, but hadn't ever heard the particulars.

If any of those DJ's arranged to have a vehicle roll up touting the name of an album or promoting the management company, I would expect the camps involved would meet the same fate. They don't, that's an important part of how it's different. Being a well-known person, artist, or band isn't itself an issue.

The DJ's (or performance troupes or insert artist name here) who connects with big camps on and off the playa are giving of their time and participating in the experience. Their involvement in fundraising is, again, to give of their time as an individual. It's not to bankroll camps in exchange for product placement and blatant brand advertising.

Actually, Syd keeps activities on and off the playa separate. Opel Productions is the 'default world' commercial production company that does numerous events in the bay area, Opulent Temple is the Burning Man camp. He's careful to separate the two, and I think he does a fair job of maintaining that distinction. I think it's for the best, as Opel does some pretty big mainstream venues, and has a decidedly non-Burning Man feel to some of the events.

products are apples. you buy an infected mushroom CD because you heard them at burning man. you buy a monster energy drink because you drank it at burning man. apples.

the orange is the one brings in ticket sales, and the other doesn't (call it a pear). you're a fan of infected mushroom, you're more likely to buy a ticket to BM. you're a fan of monster energy drink, so what? does bmorg profit? no = kicked off esplanade.

products are apples. you buy an infected mushroom CD because you heard them at burning man. you buy a monster energy drink because you drank it at burning man. apples.

the orange is the one brings in ticket sales, and the other doesn't (call it a pear). you're a fan of infected mushroom, you're more likely to buy a ticket to BM. you're a fan of monster energy drink, so what? does bmorg profit? no = kicked off esplanade.

You're stretching the analogy way too much to fit your own answer. Maybe the better fruit to pick would have been sour grapes?

products are apples. you buy an infected mushroom CD because you heard them at burning man. you buy a monster energy drink because you drank it at burning man. apples.

I wouldn't consider passing out drinks paid for by a sponsor specifically to advertise their products, with advertising "blazing" on the side of the stage-vehicle they gave & that rolls down the fucking Esplanade (by your own admission) to show off that logo to be the same thing as a DJ donating his time free of charge with no intent of making a profit and with no advertising to be the same thing.

You're pissed because you got caught out taking blatant corporate sponsorship and it bit you in the ass, and now you want to try to take out some other camps to make yourself feel better about what you did in '04. Simple armchair analysis, but I bet not far from the mark.

Oh, our camp bought our sound system with money raised through jobs, not fundraisers; pays for the booze we give away with money raised through jobs, not fundraisers; and we have never even thought about taking corporate sponsorship. Your sob story doesn't work for me.

Oh:

starlightbright wrote:some of you may remember that in 2004 we allowed ourselves to be somewhat sponsored by monster energy drink. monster provided us with a big rig sound stage and tons of drinks to giveaway.

To me "somewhat" does not equal "big rig sound stage" and "tons of drinks". You were bought & paid for.

a) I feel those are both 2 different situations. It seems in this case that a camp like Opulent Temple WISHES to have those artists and musicians there, instead of being solicited to through their agencies/managers because it will "look great on their tour schedule". At his heart I would hope Syd is trying to respect the artists that play there by showcasing their talent and giving them a stage to really get down and dirty- share what it is that got them into it in the first place, in it's purest form (i.e. booking them in the first place), as opposed to someone exploiting their talent for gain, either financial or career-related i.e. providing a stage simply so you can sell something and throw your logo out there, or if you're a DJ, just looking cool to some talent buyer from Jersey. Which as we all know is one of the great sins of Burning Man culture (being from Jersey, that is). I would HOPE that these artists booked are doing it because the recongize the festival as the opportunity to make a very deep and real connection with the people dancing to their set, and not just something to talk to about with that chick over there with the fake tits. And anyways if these artists are gonna blow up they gotta deliver at WAY more than just one festival, no matter how much of a "resume builder" it seems to be to have slots at Nexus, OT, Robot Heart etc. etc. etc.

b) I think that the booking and advance promoting of big name DJs is attracting more people that regard it to simply be one big rave. I will admit that I'm REALLY psyched to see some of the people I've seen on the schedules, but I would much rather just have it be a surprise... some of the best nights I've had dancing there are completely random experiences (will never forget Freeland at the Boombox in 03) and advertising that you're going to have all these huge DJs playing just makes it seem like one more southern California rave festival at a REALLY REALLY REALLY cool venue. I would LOVE IT if all sound camps just agreed to not publish their lineups... I think it would make the week more enjoyable getting constantly pleasantly surprised to learn that one of your favorite DJs is playing there.

c) $350 really isn't too bad for a week at a festival if you count the INSANE talent that is out there in such a short period of time. If people start regarding this thing to be a music festival foremost, it'll continue selling out year after year and many people will find themselves in the same situation they are now- seeing $1,000 tickets on Ebay that they're contemplating buying simply because Mimosa, Schpongle, Jamie Jones and Art Department (among DOZENS of others) are on fire right now and seeing them in this environment would (and will) be fucking RIDICULOUS. Honestly, I was floored when I found out Tiesto and Oakenfold were booked there a few years ago, simply because it seemed so... out of place.

d) Don't ever leave it up to anyone else but yourself to get you a Burning Man ticket. I really really feel for those artists and DJs that are without one right now and sincerely hope that they can figure something out, but I got myself some CDs and a ticket and I am fucking READY to git down.

So then you played music out of your Monster big-rig as a form of masturbation? You were hoping no-one would dance?

I love how you turn a crowd you probably would have killed for in '04 when you had the sound camp on the Esplanade into something that's bad now that you're not there. The pure sweet smell of hypocrisy.

starlightbright wrote:i was one of the founders of clan destino. some of you may remember that in 2004 we allowed ourselves to be somewhat sponsored by monster energy drink. monster provided us with a big rig sound stage and tons of drinks to giveaway. at the end of the week, that truck rolled up the esplanade with its logo blazing on the way to the gate - and in 2005, bmorg kicked our asses off the esplanade for good. and rightly so. lesson learned; we were fucking stupid to allow that to happen.

so now i'm wondering about the scheduled big name DJs lined up for 2011 (Shpongle, Infected Mushroom, EOTO, Mimosa, and Adam Ohana, etc) many arranged to play BM by coast 2 coast entertainment. granted, they'll be playing for free - but aren't these performers, like monster, gaining commercially from being on the playa? these performers are essentially brands, like monster. they get benefit by saying they were at burning man. effectively, it's corporate branding. each one of these groups and performers are doing it for the exposure - why else would coast 2 coast line them up?

so why did cland destino get kicked off the esplanade in 2005 for branding, and now camps like opulent temple and bass camp get the bmorg nod and approval for effectively doing the same thing? if it's different, i don't understand the difference. monster is a business and so is infected mushroom, et al.

has something changed?

Wow. Your logic is that of wonders. I think you asked and answered your own question in your original post.